GLG reviews

As to the tone of the review below, I would say this is the attitude and talking points many GLG lifers adopt after they accept that this is what the professional world has to offer. They know deep down that years of spamming has not led to industry experience, relevant knowledge and skills, or ability to conduct change management. That is GLG's fatal flaw. It's why it is a story of a company that is in an endless loop of discontent. All of the people who a few years back thought they were spending those monotonous hours doing admin duties to one day have a better work-life balance, something different to do, and have tech revolutionize the day-to-day have now come to tacit acceptance with the fact that there is nothing to show to the next employer. Knowledge an inch down is a Google search. You don't really learn about (insert industry or topic here) if you do an (Industry or Topic) GLG project. Anyone who says you get to learn a lot is someone who is deeply ignorant about what industry experience/knowledge actually is. "Associate, Hedge Funds" or "Manager, Life Sciences" or "Sr. Associate, Tech Media Telecom" sounds pretty damn nice! If they could get a job in that industry they put on their LinkedIn, they would have already left. Of course first jobs aren't ideal. But you are supposed to gain skills in your 20s. It is sad to see so many accept that their jobs should suck and their pay/skills should suffer. What is the point of taking this job if even after years of work you admit that you simply don't add enough value and are replaceable? If I'm a college grad with potential and I want to bust my tail, I should be able to add value to a company and not come to the conclusion that I will ultimately be worth very little. Maybe some people are entitled and overvalue themselves, but it would be wrong to say this is the majority... I believe the majority just want an opportunity and quickly realize GLG is not it. This "overvaluing" point also wouldn't explain why those who get brought in with significant experience in higher roles also come to the same conclusion about GLG The widespread submission among higher level managers should come as no surprise due to the way this company prioritizes conformity. Fresh perspective and courage should not be so highly advertised on GLG's list. I've seen countless examples of good management and ideas shot down because of insecurity or because senior leadership was simply a deaf bubble. I've heard senior leaders ask junior associates to "drink the Kool-aid" (not misquoted) instead of doing what good leaders should do in propelling and nurturing those with different perspectives. Career progression is artificial because of this cult mentality. Since skills and managerial potential don't actually matter, it's really just the wild west as far as promotions go. You are eligible within certain time bands, but they always change how they approach each cycle because they of course wildly mismanaged people the last half year. There are Managers that don't manager anything, Associates who have radically outperformed the average level to no benefit (seriously, why even have metrics?), and Chiefs of somethings whose only job it seems is to post pics with industry/media folks or go on the news about things not even remotely related to GLG. Real talk - the Manager title may be worth it if you've already sunk a year in... beyond that nothing actually will make a significant difference, and even saying Manager makes a significant difference is pushing it. Just play your cards right and don't step on anyone's toes, especially the very sensitive upper management.

-GLG is confused about who it wants to be when they grow up. Strategy arbitrarily shifts on a quarterly basis, leaving the bulk of employees discouraged, confused, and “back to square one” with regards to achieving their goals. -Investors drive unrealistic growth expectations that are then endorsed by the C-Suite and pummeled down the pipeline to the front lines. Despite triple digit YoY growth, expectations push ever-hire despite a shrinking market. -“Research” groups do not conduct research. The role is largely similar to working in an outsourced administrative services company. You can expect to spend the bulk of your time scheduling calls in lieu of your clients’ PAs. Other work perks include long hours (evenings, holidays, and weekends), as well as a long string of metrics that are subject to change every 6 weeks. GLG will cite being “a fast, dynamic company” as the reason for this if you ask in an interview. On the contrary, this is a reflection of the strategic identity crisis they’ve been in the midst of for 24 months and/or a reaction to an offering that’s come to light from a competitor. -If you’re on a product team, you can expect to be treated like a second class citizen. Job perks include getting paid less than your peers in the “Research” departments, fighting tooth-and-nail for ostensible table scraps for your teams, and the occasional promise of breakthroughs in technology. These teams are severely understaffed, despite running margins hire than any other segment of the company. -HR in conjunction with senior influence endorses an environment of dubious hiring/firing practices (or the most loved “managing out” process). They preach diversity, yet every incoming class of associates is a carbon copy of the last - white, proto-Fratboy/girl reflections of one another. The occasional token person of color. Losing the head of HR in Austin as a proponent was a grave mistake. Truly, the only person with character in that entire department. -Communication is GLG’s biggest challenge. With funding, they’ve grown rapidly in size over the course of the past few years. Despite growth, they continue to operate at a Freshman level with regards to expectation management, top-down communication, and in empowering their managers to be transparent with their teams.